That doesn't seem true, France for example has automatic cameras at traffic lights, and the yellow light has a duration fixed by law (3s on urban streets, 5s outside cities) and it has not changed since traffic light cameras were introduced. So that's one jurisdiction where your assertion is false.
(Anyway, in most places the fines from the automatic cameras do not go to the same administration that decides the speed limits and places the traffic lights, so in the end the common accusation of "they only want to make money from it" doesn't make that much sense)
He meant jurisdictions in America. Local governments here are infamous for shortening yellow lights. The companies that make automated cameras even have it in their contracts that the cities must do this.
> The contracts in place with red-light camera providers often specify maximum yellow light times
There's a lot of room for weaseling the way that's written. The contracts could specify maximum times to cover incorrect configurations like 2 minutes - that would be sensible. Technically the article is correct but it leads the reader to conclude malicious intent where there may be none.
Only the DigitalTrends article talked about contract imposed maximums. In the Chicago article it looks like the city that was acting in bad faith. There is no established link between provider imposed contracts violating best practices.
I didn't state that it was universal. It does happen to be true. You can look it up. There are even links elsewhere in this thread. Last I read about it was some time ago, but I doubt it has been fixed.
(Anyway, in most places the fines from the automatic cameras do not go to the same administration that decides the speed limits and places the traffic lights, so in the end the common accusation of "they only want to make money from it" doesn't make that much sense)